There are currently six Kemper-related threads on the first page of the digital section on TGP, and only two for Fractal. Not much trolling going on in the KPA threads, either.
Yes, that is today. But it certainly was not the behaviour in the past. Just give it some time -- esp when the Helix gets released. I am sure the Fractal fanboys will be out in full force to badmouth the unit and tell us all again how much better the Axe-FX is ...
I have followed TGP for many, many years, and there is a clear bias shown by the owners and moderators. Many of them are Axe-FX owners, and it's clear over many years that they favor Axe-FX positive posts while often censoring the negative posts. They'll also frequently pseudo-troll any posts that are positive towards the competition like Kemper and Line6. I am sure the huge Line6 Helix thread (something like 300+ pages!) is driving them crazy right now since they clearly can't shut it down, but it is giving so much limelight to the Helix and "upsetting" their baby which they so dearly love. But hey -- more posts and free content means more page views and clicks -- and more $$ to the forum owners. They should be happy!
Regarding the new Quantum FW ... yet another FW which is "more realer" than the last and "a gamechanger." How many times have I heard that from TGP and SP? The previous poster is correct. You need a double-blind test with all previous firmwares -- as well previous HW -- like the Standard and Ultra. And use similar patches that have been tweaked to their best. And then do the listening test with -- of course CLR monitors! My guess is that people can tell some of the early FW from the latest, but is FW 20 really a quantum leap over FW 19? And is an optimized patch on the Ultra that much worse than one on the XL II, etc, etc. ? I doubt it.
BTW, I own a KPA and an Ultra. Did not feel the need to jump on the "Apple-like" marketing train and upgrade every 2 years and get an XL II, Mark blah, blah. The Ultra is used as an excellent effects unit. I like the KPA better for amp tones.
This is one reason why you see so many touring pros use equipment that isn't always boutique. If it breaks, there isn't the support they need. When I looked at the CLR, it looked great on paper and the reviews, but the support network wasn't there if things went wrong. EV or Yamaha on the other hand, have extensive support -- especially in countries that are not the USA. The EV ELX112P's for example are pretty good for the money and have great support.
Of course I used the date to sort ... just noticed nothing newer than June 12 -- even on the web Rig Exchange. But I did just see one new entry dated June 18. So at least that tells me nothing is wrong on my end in terms of getting new profiles ... there just weren't any submitted the last few days until now.
Just curious why on the Rig Exchange there have been no new profiles since June 12. Maybe people out on holiday? 
I created some great cabs from some IRs that I custom mixed from readily available IRs. These were wave files which I then converted to .kipr format using Cabmaker 1.01. Is there any difference in the .kipr files if I re-converted using Cabmaker 2.0? Just wondering if I should reconvert my old IRs ...
I really like the innovative architecture and approach that Kemper has taken to model distortion. The KPA can get eerily close to the real, profiled amp. Yet does not need 2 DSP processors like the Axe-FX. I believe it's because of the way Fractal architects the simulation. It's by schematic and component level, real-time electrical modeling of the circuit (note -- I believe almost all modelers do it this way). Probably not SPICE simulation, but some sophisticated behavioural models of each component and their interactions with other devices. Each time a component is more accurately modeled and done differently, the parameters change -- which is why the patch sound also changes (frustrating users). This is also why they constantly need more powerful hardware. Hence the need to go from Ultra to II to Mk II, XL, etc. etc. I really hate this way of marketing and upgrade path. Especially when only the higher end models seem to be available.
The KPA model is a black box approach. It doesn't need to know anything about the circuit. The profiler does this. Genius! For the same amp sound, the Axe-FX might have to do some serious number crunching -- modeling the circuit using a dedicated ADI TigerSHARC DSP. While the KPA models on a higher level and recognizes the sound charateristics instead. If you do it right, you can arrive at a similar sound with much less computation. And be more accurate in the process.
Anyways, I am hoping the current KPA has plenty of life left with many more firmware upgrades to go before it becomes EOL. It sure seems that way.
Sound copyrights are in my opinion, never going to happen. See my post here in this thread:
I found that the "RETURN LEVEL" on the KPA is very important for the sound of the profile, it will automatically adjust to something it thinks is right, but we moved it back to 0.0dB most of the time. On the other hand we had the "cleaner" profiles set to a lower level/gain, that's why they are a little quieter. Easily adjusted by the output volume or even the gain knob.
Thanks a lot for this info -- very enlightening. During profiling, did you find that the KPA is setting the return level at a negative dB, and you increase it back to 0.0 dB? And if you do this, does the output clip? I found that when I setup a signal chain for profiling which includes my DAW and set the peaks for -18 dbFS, this is too hot for the KPA, and I have to dial back the KPA return level to -10dB or so to avoid clipping. Not really sure why this is the case -- maybe something going on in my signal chain or cabling.
I can create the gain staging by
1. Setting the DAW so that peaks are at -18 dbFS and readjust the KPA return level so that it doesn't clip
OR
2. Set the KPA return level to 0.0 dB and adjust the gain level somewhere else in my signal chain (mic pre, DAW, etc.)
I have heard that either way shouldn't matter for profiling, and indeed for some things I have profiled, this has been the case. Just curious what others do in this regard.
The KB profiles don't show up on the Rig Exchange -- at least when using Rig Manager...
Yes, please reveal the settings for the chorus that would replicate the Retro-Sonic. The settings I have found so far (though have not spent much time) don't have as much stereo separation or chorus like I can get from my pedals.
The null test pretty much proves it. No question. There's also another way that doesn't involve listening or using the KPA, but only Kemper can do it. The profile .kipr file contains characteristics of the amp profiled. These are most likely specific parameters for the profiling algorithm. It is easy for them to confirm that two profiles are identical as they would have identical parameters. The odds of this happening for two separate profiling events is probably nil -- possibly even if you did 2 profiles right after each other, as there might be some variations as well as each session being slightly different.
Either way, it isn't cool taking credit for profiling when you've copied somebody's work exactly. It also calls into question all the other profiles posted -- whether they were obtained ethically or not.
I don't think amp companies could ever copyright their amp's sound. Harley-Davidson tried to do a sound trademark on their V-twin sound and eventually gave up. See http://articles.latimes.com/2000/jun/21/business/fi-43145
I think this sets a partial precedent, but you can argue that in Harley's case, the sound is only part of the brand -- not the full functional part of being a motorcycle. An amp's sound IS its primary function.
However, companies can already protect their intellectual property through patents of their circuit designs, trademarks, logos, and other branding mechanisms. As mentioned before, if you indeed could trademark a sound, then enforcement would be difficult as many sounds of boutique amps are copies of other brands whose patents have long expired. And the entire sound industry would be turned on its head as people try to trademark simple tones and sound (regardless of how they would be created) and troll the industry for $$. It would be utter chaos.
For a good summary of sound trademark, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_trademark
Just remembered that another TGP moderator is also a Fractal owner/ass kisser. And I just discovered that the TGP moderator I talked about in my previous post is a CO-OWNER of TGP! No way is he going to be disciplined for anything since he owns the joint. No wonder he sits back and posts whatever he wants. He's probably making way more $$ from AdSense/Google running that forum than from anything using a guitar.
Quote
Lets face the facts...Fanboyism is present on just about every forum. Whether its guitars or sports. We have our fair share here as well...believe it or not
Yes, that is absolutely true. You expect fan-boyism on a site specific to that item, whether it's the Kemper site or the Fractal site. But I am talking about a moderator on a site that is NOT product specific. I expect fan boy-ism on sites like TGP, but I expect more from a moderator -- esp one who has more powers than others -- i.e. can ban users, close threads, and not be ignored. 
He's a constant advertisement to the product in almost every posting.
Ignoring his posts would solve this for me. Unfortunately, his misinformation on other products continues and clouds the picture for many others searching for important information regarding modelers. It's too bad. Also -- I am also sure that if this discussion were brought to that forum, I would be banned.
As a Fractal and Kemper owner, I have found it frustrating -- and embarrassing -- the amount of fan boy-ism on other forums (i.e. The Gear Page) regarding Fractal. Especially coming from people who are supposed to be moderators. They constantly troll the forums for any Axe-FX or Kemper posting to extol the virtues of Fractal. They'll always end the posting with some caveat that it's their opinion and everybody should do their own thing. Yet the tone of the post is always that there must be something wrong with you if you do not love Fractal. 
Example: http://www.thegearpage.net/boa…p?p=18559784&postcount=19
If you know the history, you'll also find the poster saying that for a PA monitor -- QSC Q10 as being the best, then moving to RCF, then finally the CLR. Each time, it's always "a veil has been lifted," etc. The same goes for each firmware release and each new model. I guess what it means is their previous opinions were all wrong.
I guess I should use an ignore option on these fan boys ... But it's sad that they can influence so many people who don't know the history or motivations.
Update: I tried ignoring the poster, but you can't for a moderator. 
Just wanted to chime in on one of the Kemper vs Axe-FX myths and opinions: Axe-FX effects are much better. After listening closely on both, I don't believe this is true. Fractal certainly has a lot of effects and routing options, but I think the Kemper easily holds its own against it. You really need to isolate each effect and not have so many routes or signals which can certainly enhance any sound.
Certainly if you're playing through a PA in a live situation, I highly doubt you can tell the difference between the units. Maybe recorded direct and through high-quality headphones or monitors, but if you're really recording the items -- you'd probably use delay/reverb from SW VST or dedicated hardware.
I've owned an Axe-FX Ultra from almost the beginning and still own it, but don't use it that much. I currently own and use the Kemper. I have written an extensive document on my experiences with these devices and my experiences with using them as well as interfacing with the respective companies. Maybe one day I'll post it here. But suffice it to say that the Kemper to *me* is the better product.
In a nutshell, the Kemper is far easier to use, tweak, and dial-in a tone that I like. The thousands of profiles out there are amazing, and the list continues to grow. Only after doing my own profiles of my own gear that I started to realize the power of the profiling concept, and the ability to share these profiles. In my opinion, this far exceeds any pseudo Ultra-Res IR concept (Google this and Jay Mitchell to see how bogus this concept really is). The Axe-FX simulates the circuit schematic and thus needs a schematic to start with. This is lower-level simulation (simulating the components such as tubes, transformers, etc.). Most every amp sim (HW or SW) does it this way. I love the Kemper philosophy of treating the amp like a black box and determining its distortion characteristics. This is simulation at the highest level and is truly innovative and novel.
Sure, the Axe-FX has an over-priced, dedicated foot controller, has more flexible routing, "better" effects, and a USB audio interface. But for Live Sound, I challenge anybody in the audience to hear the difference in effects using the same PA. And in recording -- true recordings use post-processing for those most of the time. Also, do I really need 4 parallel chains in stereo of effects and amps? Sure -- nice to have, but rarely used in most cases. Flexibility overkill.
Then there's the whole business side and attitudes of the Axe-FX team. It just doesn't sit well with me. The arrogance, condescension to customers, and poor behaviour of the people involved -- both from the company and their fan boys -- is astounding. I also don't buy all the gimmicks (Ultra-Res) IR and marketing tricks (I'm all sold out of the II -- but the II XL (my most expensive product) is available!).
If you want to just sit back and enjoy playing with awesome tone, with minimal amount of tweaking, as well as enjoy thousands of different amps, pedals, distortion devices, etc. -- then the Kemper is for you!
Not really sure why you would need a stompbox for a Dumble sound when you can get that from an amp profile. Unless you want to stack that tone with a lot of other ODs, etc.
In the Rig Exchange, check out KB's recent uploads. He's profiled the Zendrive a few times. I thought it was way too wooly and bassy for my tastes, but you can certainly EQ and tweak the settings to your liking.
Thanks for all the cool profiles ... esp the stompboxes!
Just curious on your exact signal path when you profile OD stompboxes. Do you use the TRS 1/4" Kemper return input while profiling? Do you do it very loud, and where do you do most of your gain adjustments to avoid KPA input clipping?
I've tried profiling stompboxes through a clean amp driving a 2x12 and mic'ed with a SM57. I can get a good profile, but would like a louder default volume level without tweaking the volume levels in the amp/cab, etc. I noticed your profiles are loud, even for ODs that are not that high gain. Thanks!
